Determining the Validity of a Prophecy

[Vinayaka]

I'm not trying to argue against prophecies, per se. I'm trying to form a set of criteria that help us determine which prophecies are valid.

Oh, okay. I misunderstood. Sorry about giving you my input then. You think there are valid prophecies.

 

[Deeje]

Prophecies play a role in many major religions, and many faithful use them to prove that their faith is the "One True Faith"™. However, I've found that pretty much every prophecy fails at some point.

If the prophecy is about something that is probably going to happen anyway, then it's useless. It's like me predicting that there will be seismic activity in California in the next twelve months. It's on a fault line, of course there will be seismic activity there. Or the psychics who predict each year that there will be conflict in the Middle East, or political trouble somewhere. These are going to happen anyway, anyone can predict them. It's just not worth bothering with these.

And if the prophecy could have been written AFTER the event that fulfilled it and simply inserted into an earlier work, then it's not worth bothering with it because it means nothing, it was just some guy who wrote what happened and tried to make it look like a prophecy when it really wasn't.

And if the prophecy was only fulfilled because someone embellished the event that allegedly fulfilled it to make it look like the prophecy was correct, but the actual event didn't happen as described and so didn't fulfill the prophecy, then again, it's not worth bothering with it because the claim it was fulfilled is wrong.

And if the prophecy was only fulfilled because someone came along after the prophecy was written and then decided to perform the action that fulfilled it, then it's not worth bothering with the prophecy because the author didn't actually have any knowledge of the future, and thus it isn't a prophecy.

And finally, if you have a prophecy that is vague and ambiguous, it's not worth bothering with it because you can never be sure if the interpretation you have is the one the author intended.

So, I've used these to create five criteria that a prophecy needs to meet before I will consider it as valid, or as evidence that a particular faith is correct:

1. The prophecy must not be about something that is likely to happen anyway.
2. Where we have verified that the prophecy was written prior to the event that fulfilled it.
3. Where we have verified that the event that fulfilled it really took place in a way that fulfilled the prophecy.
4. The the fulfilling event was not done by someone simply to make the prophecy come true.
5. The prophecy is specific and is not open to interpretation.

What are your thoughts on these criteria? Do you disagree with them? If so, why?

I find it rather strange that an atheist would be interested in prophesy to begin with....?

Is there something in the back of the atheist mind that creates a glimmer of doubt perhaps?

If it can be proven that prophesy is indeed 'history written in advance'...what does that mean for an atheist?

 

[sayak83]

Prophecies play a role in many major religions, and many faithful use them to prove that their faith is the "One True Faith"™. However, I've found that pretty much every prophecy fails at some point.

If the prophecy is about something that is probably going to happen anyway, then it's useless. It's like me predicting that there will be seismic activity in California in the next twelve months. It's on a fault line, of course there will be seismic activity there. Or the psychics who predict each year that there will be conflict in the Middle East, or political trouble somewhere. These are going to happen anyway, anyone can predict them. It's just not worth bothering with these.

And if the prophecy could have been written AFTER the event that fulfilled it and simply inserted into an earlier work, then it's not worth bothering with it because it means nothing, it was just some guy who wrote what happened and tried to make it look like a prophecy when it really wasn't.

And if the prophecy was only fulfilled because someone embellished the event that allegedly fulfilled it to make it look like the prophecy was correct, but the actual event didn't happen as described and so didn't fulfill the prophecy, then again, it's not worth bothering with it because the claim it was fulfilled is wrong.

And if the prophecy was only fulfilled because someone came along after the prophecy was written and then decided to perform the action that fulfilled it, then it's not worth bothering with the prophecy because the author didn't actually have any knowledge of the future, and thus it isn't a prophecy.

And finally, if you have a prophecy that is vague and ambiguous, it's not worth bothering with it because you can never be sure if the interpretation you have is the one the author intended.

So, I've used these to create five criteria that a prophecy needs to meet before I will consider it as valid, or as evidence that a particular faith is correct:

1. The prophecy must not be about something that is likely to happen anyway.
2. Where we have verified that the prophecy was written prior to the event that fulfilled it.
3. Where we have verified that the event that fulfilled it really took place in a way that fulfilled the prophecy.
4. The the fulfilling event was not done by someone simply to make the prophecy come true.
5. The prophecy is specific and is not open to interpretation.

What are your thoughts on these criteria? Do you disagree with them? If so, why?

A prophecy is the same as a prediction. So all the rules of science regarding making specific predictions and verifying these specific prediction applies. On the whole, I agree.

 

[Tiberius]

Oh, okay. I misunderstood. Sorry about giving you my input then. You think there are valid prophecies.

I think the idea of prophecies being valid is not impossible (if we grant that there is some way that people can get knowledge about future events), but I've never seen any prophecies that actually pass these criteria.

 

[Tiberius]

I find it rather strange that an atheist would be interested in prophesy to begin with....?

Is there something in the back of the atheist mind that creates a glimmer of doubt perhaps?

If it can be proven that prophesy is indeed 'history written in advance'...what does that mean for an atheist?

It means I have to re-evaluate my position.

However, I've not yet seen any prophecy that can pass these criteria.

 

[Tiberius]

A prophecy is the same as a prediction. So all the rules of science regarding making specific predictions and verifying these specific prediction applies. On the whole, I agree.

I gotta disagree. A prediction would be something like, "If I launch this projectile at this angle, at such-and-such a speed, and taking into account atmospheric drag, windspeed and the Earth's rotation, I can predict that the projectile will land at these specific coordinates."

Yet we would never call that a prophecy.

 

[WonderingWorrier]

Prophecies play a role in many major religions, and many faithful use them to prove that their faith is the "One True Faith"™. However, I've found that pretty much every prophecy fails at some point.

If the prophecy is about something that is probably going to happen anyway, then it's useless. It's like me predicting that there will be seismic activity in California in the next twelve months. It's on a fault line, of course there will be seismic activity there. Or the psychics who predict each year that there will be conflict in the Middle East, or political trouble somewhere. These are going to happen anyway, anyone can predict them. It's just not worth bothering with these.

And if the prophecy could have been written AFTER the event that fulfilled it and simply inserted into an earlier work, then it's not worth bothering with it because it means nothing, it was just some guy who wrote what happened and tried to make it look like a prophecy when it really wasn't.

And if the prophecy was only fulfilled because someone embellished the event that allegedly fulfilled it to make it look like the prophecy was correct, but the actual event didn't happen as described and so didn't fulfill the prophecy, then again, it's not worth bothering with it because the claim it was fulfilled is wrong.

And if the prophecy was only fulfilled because someone came along after the prophecy was written and then decided to perform the action that fulfilled it, then it's not worth bothering with the prophecy because the author didn't actually have any knowledge of the future, and thus it isn't a prophecy.

And finally, if you have a prophecy that is vague and ambiguous, it's not worth bothering with it because you can never be sure if the interpretation you have is the one the author intended.

So, I've used these to create five criteria that a prophecy needs to meet before I will consider it as valid, or as evidence that a particular faith is correct:

1. The prophecy must not be about something that is likely to happen anyway.
2. Where we have verified that the prophecy was written prior to the event that fulfilled it.
3. Where we have verified that the event that fulfilled it really took place in a way that fulfilled the prophecy.
4. The the fulfilling event was not done by someone simply to make the prophecy come true.
5. The prophecy is specific and is not open to interpretation.

What are your thoughts on these criteria? Do you disagree with them? If so, why?

Religious prophecies can match your criteria, be verified, proven valid. With science.

There are religious signs, miracles, and prophecies that are not even speaking of past or future events.
They are just speaking about when understanding the words is reached.

People wait for "prophecies" that will never happen within their lifetimes unless they understand the words spoken. Because that is how they can really happen. They can happen the moment someone realises how they happen.

There are religious sentences that speak with an extremely high intelligence. Some people laugh because they do not understand what is being said.


It's the keyword structure pattern within sentences that makes them true.
Symbols attached to other symbols in their specific positions of one single symbol.


Mythical creatures are real in the same way.

It's why scientists cant find evidence of biblical events like the exodus out of Egypt etc.

Science can also show where exactly to find a philosophers stone that can turn lead (and other metals) into gold. Its actually quite simple.


The words become true when understood using science.

Remove all meanings of words from the mind. Follow the words. Each word. Then prophecies happen as the meaning appears.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The prophecy must not be about something that is likely to happen anyway.

1. Where we have verified that the prophecy was written prior to the event that fulfilled it.
2. Where we have verified that the event that fulfilled it really took place in a way that fulfilled the prophecy.
3. The the fulfilling event was not done by someone simply to make the prophecy come true.
4. The prophecy is specific and is not open to interpretation.

What are your thoughts on these criteria? Do you disagree with them? If so, why?

It is interesting to me that the supposed prophecies that Jesus fulfilled seem to violate #4. IOW a zillion people are born in Bethlehem. Or they spiritualize bringing peace.

 

[Tiberius]

Religious prophecies can match your criteria, be verified, proven valid. With science.

There are religious signs, miracles, and prophecies that are not even speaking of past or future events.
They are just speaking about when understanding the words is reached.

People wait for "prophecies" that will never happen within their lifetimes unless they understand the words spoken. Because that is how they can really happen. They can happen the moment someone realises how they happen.

There are religious sentences that speak with an extremely high intelligence. Some people laugh because they do not understand what is being said.


It's the keyword structure pattern within sentences that makes them true.
Symbols attached to other symbols in their specific positions of one single symbol.


Mythical creatures are real in the same way.

It's why scientists cant find evidence of biblical events like the exodus out of Egypt etc.

Science can also show where exactly to find a philosophers stone that can turn lead (and other metals) into gold. Its actually quite simple.


The words become true when understood using science.

Remove all meanings of words from the mind. Follow the words. Each word. Then prophecies happen as the meaning appears.

Not sure what you mean here

In any case, if there was an exodus out of Egypt, there's no way it wouldn't leave behind physical evidence. But that's outside the scope of this thread. If you'd like to start a new thread to discuss the historicity of the exodus, I'll be happen to participate.

Also, there's no such thing as a philosopher's stone. Science has not shown that it's easy. Science doesn't even say it's real.

 

[Deeje]

It means I have to re-evaluate my position.

However, I've not yet seen any prophecy that can pass these criteria.

I also find it a little arrogant when humans demand that God provides them with evidence that He and his word should be trusted when they demonstrate no trust in him at all...?
Why do you think there are those who have no doubts?...when others have nothing but doubts...?

There is criteria that the Bible gives for those who would worship the true God....we have to fit those, not the other way around.
John 6:44, 65.....Jesus said...
"No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him. . . . .no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”

He also made this promise....
"Whoever has my commandments and observes them is the one who loves me. In turn, whoever loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and will clearly show myself to him.”

We must first show faith by our diligent search for God and a willingness to obey him and accept his truth....for only then will we even come into God's field of vision. He has nothing to prove to us because creation itself testifies to his existence in very tangible ways. It is we who must prove ourselves to him, if we want to continue to live as citizens of his incoming Kingdom....I believe that this requires that we get to know him, not just get to know 'about' him in some distant fashion. (John 17:3)

Prophesy is another very tangible way to demonstrate God's existence. When the Jews were exiled in Babylon and their homeland was left desolate and their Temple destroyed, as part of the prophesy of their restoration and repatriation it was said that only a remnant of Israel would return and that was fulfilled. It was also prophesied that a man named Cyrus would be their liberator. (Isaiah 44:1) And this too was fulfilled when the gates of Babylon were carelessly left open and Cyrus' troops walked straight in and conquered the most fortified city in existence.

Daniel too foretold the march of world powers from Babylon, through Medo-Persia, to Greece, to Rome and finally to the present day rulers (Anglo-America), when he prophesied that in the days of the present "kings", "the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed. And this kingdom will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it alone will stand forever".(Daniel 2:44)

There were world events prophesied to identify that period as well, (Matthew 24:3-14) and these fit the last century like no other. (2 Timothy 3:1-5)

So I have faith in his prophesies, but whether you do is entirely up to you.

 

[Tiberius]

I also find it a little arrogant when humans demand that God provides them with evidence that He and his word should be trusted when they demonstrate no trust in him at all...?
Why do you think there are those who have no doubts?...when others have nothing but doubts...?

There is criteria that the Bible gives for those who would worship the true God....we have to fit those, not the other way around.
John 6:44, 65.....Jesus said...
"No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him. . . . .no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”

He also made this promise....
"Whoever has my commandments and observes them is the one who loves me. In turn, whoever loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and will clearly show myself to him.”

We must first show faith by our diligent search for God and a willingness to obey him and accept his truth....for only then will we even come into God's field of vision. He has nothing to prove to us because creation itself testifies to his existence in very tangible ways. It is we who must prove ourselves to him, if we want to continue to live as citizens of his incoming Kingdom....I believe that this requires that we get to know him, not just get to know 'about' him in some distant fashion. (John 17:3)

I don't see how this is relevant. All this is saying is that if you decide, "I want to believe this particular thing," then you'll be more likely to accept an argument that supports it and more likely to reject an argument against it, regardless of the validity of those arguments.

In short, a person who has decided to believe in God is probably going to accept a very poor argument that supports God and is probably going to reject a very strong argument that shows there isn't a God.

Prophesy is another very tangible way to demonstrate God's existence. When the Jews were exiled in Babylon and their homeland was left desolate and their Temple destroyed, as part of the prophesy of their restoration and repatriation it was said that only a remnant of Israel would return and that was fulfilled. It was also prophesied that a man named Cyrus would be their liberator. (Isaiah 44:1) And this too was fulfilled when the gates of Babylon were carelessly left open and Cyrus' troops walked straight in and conquered the most fortified city in existence.

Can you show that this prophecy meets all five criteria?

Daniel too foretold the march of world powers from Babylon, through Medo-Persia, to Greece, to Rome and finally to the present day rulers (Anglo-America), when he prophesied that in the days of the present "kings", "the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed. And this kingdom will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it alone will stand forever".(Daniel 2:44)

Can you show that this prophecy meets all five criteria?

There were world events prophesied to identify that period as well, (Matthew 24:3-14) and these fit the last century like no other. (2 Timothy 3:1-5)

Can you show that this prophecy meets all five criteria?

 

[sayak83]

I gotta disagree. A prediction would be something like, "If I launch this projectile at this angle, at such-and-such a speed, and taking into account atmospheric drag, windspeed and the Earth's rotation, I can predict that the projectile will land at these specific coordinates."

Yet we would never call that a prophecy.

Solar eclipse time and location is a prediction as well. If then clauses not necessary always.

 

[Tiberius]

Solar eclipse time and location is a prediction as well.

Agreed.

If then clauses not necessary always.

Huh?

 

[sayak83]

Agreed.



Huh?

You said predictions are like "If X is done, Y happens". I was saying that is not necessary.

 

[danieldemol]

Or the person has partial foreknowledge.

There's another phrase for "partial foreknowledge" its called guessing and having part of your guesses turn out correct.
In my opinion.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I have always considered Prophecy to be a nonsense, and that they can not prove anything at all.
The result is always a matter of chance and interpretation.

How many people would risk an investment on a prophecy?
Prophecy is in the same ball park as fortune telling.
and probably even less reliable.

At least a fortune tellers restrict themselves to likely outcomes, observation and vagueness of prediction.

 

[Deeje]

I don't see how this is relevant. All this is saying is that if you decide, "I want to believe this particular thing," then you'll be more likely to accept an argument that supports it and more likely to reject an argument against it, regardless of the validity of those arguments.

If you don't want to believe in God, what is anyone going to tell you, according to your own reasoning?

In short, a person who has decided to believe in God is probably going to accept a very poor argument that supports God and is probably going to reject a very strong argument that shows there isn't a God.

And a person who does not believe in God is going to do exactly the same....

I have never come across a strong argument for there being no Intelligent Creator.

Can you show that this prophecy meets all five criteria?

Can you show that this prophecy meets all five criteria?

Can you show that this prophecy meets all five criteria?

Sorry, but God is not interested in your criteria....he has his own and expects us to meet that....so how are you doing in that respect? I think you completely underestimate his interest in atheists....

IMO, He owes us nothing.....we owe him everything.

 

[danieldemol]

When the Jews were exiled in Babylon and their homeland was left desolate and their Temple destroyed, as part of the prophesy of their restoration and repatriation it was said that only a remnant of Israel would return and that was fulfilled. It was also prophesied that a man named Cyrus would be their liberator. (Isaiah 44:1) And this too was fulfilled when the gates of Babylon were carelessly left open and Cyrus' troops walked straight in and conquered the most fortified city in existence.

Are you sure that reference isn't Isaiah 44:28? Not that it matters. From wikipedia;

'While it is widely accepted that the book of Isaiah is rooted in a historic prophet called Isaiah, who lived in the Kingdom of Judah during the 8th century BCE, it is also widely accepted that this prophet did not write the entire book of Isaiah.[9][23]

• Historical situation: Chapters 40–55 presuppose that Jerusalem has already been destroyed (they are not framed as prophecy) and the Babylonian exile is already in effect – they speak from a present in which the Exile is about to end. Chapters 56–66 assume an even later situation, in which the people are already returned to Jerusalem and the rebuilding of the Temple is already under way.[24]
• Anonymity: Isaiah's name suddenly stops being used after chapter 39.[25]
• Style: There is a sudden change in style and theology after chapter 40; numerous key words and phrases found in one section are not found in the other.[26]

The composition history of Isaiah reflects a major difference in the way authorship was regarded in ancient Israel and in modern societies; the ancients did not regard it as inappropriate to supplement an existing work while remaining anonymous.[27]'

Source: Book of Isaiah - Wikipedia

In other words it is not demonstrable that the prophecy was made before the return from captivity and/or by Isaiah in my opinion.

Daniel too foretold the march of world powers from Babylon, through Medo-Persia, to Greece, to Rome and finally to the present day rulers (Anglo-America), when he prophesied that in the days of the present "kings", "the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed. And this kingdom will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it alone will stand forever".(Daniel 2:44)

Ah, quoting a prophecy that has not even been fulfilled as an example of a prophecy that meets the OP's mentioned criteria #2 of being fulfilled lol.

There were world events prophesied to identify that period as well, (Matthew 24:3-14) and these fit the last century like no other. (2 Timothy 3:1-5)

Why cut off the pophecy at vs 14 when it goes to verse 35 inclusive? Is it because that demonstrates the prophecy to be false because verse 35 includes the words, "Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."? Compare that to the NWT verse 35 "Truly I say to you that this generation will by no means pass away until all these things happen."

In my opinion.

 

[Vinayaka]

I think the idea of prophecies being valid is not impossible (if we grant that there is some way that people can get knowledge about future events), but I've never seen any prophecies that actually pass these criteria.

Yes, I agree. Lots of things were once seen as impossible. I suppose evidence could prove otherwise. If a person actually had that ability, wouldn't he be able to accurately predict a card drawn out of a deck 100 times out of 100? I don't see it happening any time soon.

 

[night912]

I also find it a little arrogant when humans demand that God provides them with evidence that He and his word should be trusted when they demonstrate no trust in him at all...?
Why do you think there are those who have no doubts?...when others have nothing but doubts...?

There is criteria that the Bible gives for those who would worship the true God....we have to fit those, not the other way around.
John 6:44, 65.....Jesus said...
"No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him. . . . .no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”

He also made this promise....
"Whoever has my commandments and observes them is the one who loves me. In turn, whoever loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and will clearly show myself to him.”

We must first show faith by our diligent search for God and a willingness to obey him and accept his truth....for only then will we even come into God's field of vision. He has nothing to prove to us because creation itself testifies to his existence in very tangible ways. It is we who must prove ourselves to him, if we want to continue to live as citizens of his incoming Kingdom....I believe that this requires that we get to know him, not just get to know 'about' him in some distant fashion. (John 17:3)

Prophesy is another very tangible way to demonstrate God's existence. When the Jews were exiled in Babylon and their homeland was left desolate and their Temple destroyed, as part of the prophesy of their restoration and repatriation it was said that only a remnant of Israel would return and that was fulfilled. It was also prophesied that a man named Cyrus would be their liberator. (Isaiah 44:1) And this too was fulfilled when the gates of Babylon were carelessly left open and Cyrus' troops walked straight in and conquered the most fortified city in existence.

Daniel too foretold the march of world powers from Babylon, through Medo-Persia, to Greece, to Rome and finally to the present day rulers (Anglo-America), when he prophesied that in the days of the present "kings", "the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed. And this kingdom will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it alone will stand forever".(Daniel 2:44)

There were world events prophesied to identify that period as well, (Matthew 24:3-14) and these fit the last century like no other. (2 Timothy 3:1-5)

So I have faith in his prophesies, but whether you do is entirely up to you.

I find it to be really arrogant when some people believe that they've achieved and gain some kind of divine knowledge that grants them the ability to read and understand religious texts. Their ignorance/arrogance blinds them to the point where they unwilling to accept that those who disagree with them are also capable of reading and understanding their religious texts.